DNA‐Based Identification of Forensically ImportantLucilia(Diptera: Calliphoridae) in the Continental United States*

Abstract

Correct species identification is critical when dipteran larvae are used for inference of the postmortem interval. To facilitate DNA-based identification of forensically important flies of the genus Lucilia in the continental United States, we develop a vouchered reference collection and DNA sequence database. A total of 122 specimens were collected for nine of the 10 species of Lucilia reported to occur in the continental United States. Using the polymerase chain reaction and DNA sequencing, data were obtained for an 1100-bp region of the mitochondrial gene encoding cytochrome oxidase I (COI). We consider a species suitable for DNA-based identification if it is exclusively monophyletic in >95% of bootstrap pseudoreplicate phylogenetic analyses. Seven of the nine species meet that criterion. Two species (Lucilia coeruleiviridis and Lucilia mexicana) share COI sequence and cannot be distinguished using our reference database. We conclude that DNA-based identification is likely to be successful for the other seven species.

Intra-puparial development of Lucilia eximia (Diptera, Calliphoridae)

“…In the neotropics this species is found from the north of Mexico to south South America (Whitworth 2014), and had also been reported in forensic studies in Europe (Velásquez et al 2010), in North America (Debry et al 2013;Sanford et al 2014), in Central America (Garcés et al 2004;Calderón-Arguedas et al 2005), and in South America (Rocha et al 2010;RamosPastrana and Wolff 2011;Barros-Souza et al 2012;UrarahyRodrigues et al 2013;Ramos-Pastrana et al 2014). The objectives of this research were to analyze the intra-puparial development of Lucilia eximia, and to describe chronological and morphological changes that occur during this stage.…”

Phylogenetic radiation of the greenbottle flies (Diptera, Calliphoridae, Luciliinae)

“…The largest genus in the subfamily, Lucilia has received few quantitative phylogenetic studies (Aubertin 1933, Stevens and Wall 1996, 1997, Wells et al 2007, Park et al 2009, DeBry et al 2012, Sonet et al 2012), with research generally focusing on species of medical, veterinary or forensic interest in specific geographic regions (Stevens and Wall 2001, Chen et al 2004, Wallman et al 2005, Harvey et al 2008, Reibe et al 2009, Liu et al 2011, Boehme et al 2012, DeBry et al 2012, Nelson et al 2012, Sonet et al 2013). The most comprehensive revision of the genus was published by Aubertin (1933), who recognised 27 species.…”

Case 3665 Musca purpurascens Walker, 1836 (Insecta, Diptera, calliphoridae): proposed conservation of prevailing usage of name by setting aside the unidentifiable female holotype and replacing it with a male neotype

“…Also see Whitworth et al (2007) for a discussion of factors which can make barcode data unreliable for species distinctions. Another example of problems with use of DNA to distinguish species of Lucilia is found in DeBry et al (2013). DNA analysis was used to separate Nearctic species and the authors noted that L. coeruleiviridis and L. mexicana were indistinguishable based on DNA, but the species are clearly separate based on morphological characters.…”

“…161). DeBry et al (2013) also noted that DNA analysis did not distinguish these two species. Two specimens of L. eximia from East Baton Rouge, LA also grouped with these specimens, though upon re-examination they proved to be typical for L. eximia.…”